{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"submitter":["Seehra J"],"funding":["National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)"],"pagination":["601-605"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8633600"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["43(5)"],"pubmed_abstract":["Background
The reported initial strong treatment effects reported in early trials that are refuted in subsequent future studies assessing the same interventions have been attributed to novelty bias. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is any evidence of novelty bias in the reported treatment effects of orthodontics interventions.Materials and methods
Relevant orthodontic systematic review (SRs) topics containing at least one meta-analysis on either binary or continuous outcomes with a minimum of three trials considered important areas in the field of orthodontic practice were identified. SR, meta-analysis, and primary study-level characteristics were extracted. Descriptive statistics were calculated at the SRs, meta-analysis, and at the individual study lev"],"journal":["European journal of orthodontics"],"pubmed_title":["Assessment of early exaggerated treatment effects in orthodontic interventions using cumulative meta-analysis."],"pmcid":["PMC8633600"],"funding_grant_id":["ACF-2019-17-019"],"pubmed_authors":["Seehra J","Stonehouse-Smith D","Pandis N"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"Assessment of early exaggerated treatment effects in orthodontic interventions using cumulative meta-analysis.","description":"Background
The reported initial strong treatment effects reported in early trials that are refuted in subsequent future studies assessing the same interventions have been attributed to novelty bias. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is any evidence of novelty bias in the reported treatment effects of orthodontics interventions.Materials and methods
Relevant orthodontic systematic review (SRs) topics containing at least one meta-analysis on either binary or continuous outcomes with a minimum of three trials considered important areas in the field of orthodontic practice were identified. SR, meta-analysis, and primary study-level characteristics were extracted. Descriptive statistics were calculated at the SRs, meta-analysis, and at the individual study lev","dates":{"release":"2021-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2021 Oct","modification":"2025-04-26T09:34:26.513Z","creation":"2022-02-11T13:53:37.712Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC8633600","cross_references":{"pubmed":["34184029"],"doi":["10.1093/ejo/cjab042"]}}